Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

Mid-Eastern - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 1
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st UMES 1,315.1853 1,318.5897 1,316.8864 -11.43 58.62 -0.057
2nd Florida A&M 1,286.6510 1,293.0854 1,289.8642 36.63 53.26 -0.103
3rd South Carolina St. 1,238.7560 1,232.4900 1,235.6190 34.71 50.70 -0.141
4th Hampton 1,179.2478 1,181.9796 1,180.6129 34.02 47.73 -0.198
5th Morgan St. 1,167.5352 1,179.1529 1,173.3297 31.82 46.48 -0.207
6th Norfolk St. 1,162.7560 1,156.1726 1,159.4597 32.66 47.33 -0.215
7th N.C. Central 1,122.6475 1,155.5268 1,138.9685 32.27 43.70 -0.241
8th Bethune-Cookman 1,140.5888 1,136.0707 1,138.3275 30.86 47.36 -0.224
9th Howard 1,129.1142 1,133.8596 1,131.4845 31.98 44.68 -0.211
10th Coppin St. 1,105.0948 1,105.7187 1,105.4067 30.67 44.46 -0.264
11th Delaware St. 1,100.9961 1,101.3245 1,101.1603 30.75 42.55 -0.247
12th N.C. A&T 925.0152 909.9022 917.4276 22.80 33.08 -0.473
13th Savannah St. 887.2529 894.9240 891.0802 22.89 30.24 -0.513

ViPR Adjusted Offenses and Defenses are adjusted to expected values against an average team in the same division.

ViPR Division Adjusted Offenses

Rnk. Team Hit% Kill% HE% AST% O_DIG% O_BLK% ACE%
1st Florida A&M 0.1899 36.14 17.15 33.32 47.82 7.05 3.95
2nd UMES 0.1832 35.55 17.23 32.95 47.73 5.70 35.86
3rd South Carolina St. 0.1294 33.07 20.12 30.72 49.29 6.97 7.19
4th Howard 0.0931 28.40 19.09 26.17 55.00 6.16 4.61
5th Hampton 0.0900 26.73 17.73 24.39 55.85 6.22 4.13
6th Morgan St. 0.0882 28.70 19.88 26.05 55.43 6.16 4.53
7th Bethune-Cookman 0.0793 28.23 20.30 26.55 54.41 6.31 4.78
8th N.C. Central 0.0782 30.64 22.82 28.02 50.71 7.10 5.06
9th Delaware St. 0.0753 27.19 19.66 25.21 57.39 6.11 4.31
10th Norfolk St. 0.0717 30.31 23.14 27.76 50.63 7.66 4.37
11th Coppin St. 0.0444 27.04 22.60 24.51 56.54 6.78 5.86
12th N.C. A&T -0.0635 19.80 26.15 18.06 65.96 6.15 5.04
13th Savannah St. -0.0942 16.74 26.16 15.32 66.35 7.09 2.74

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st UMES 0.2398 39.84 15.85 36.64 44.45 6.98 2.70
2nd South Carolina St. 0.2706 40.96 13.90 36.84 44.77 5.46 7.16
3rd Norfolk St. 0.2864 41.92 13.28 38.45 45.02 4.96 6.24
4th Hampton 0.2883 41.56 12.73 38.25 43.24 4.01 7.45
5th Florida A&M 0.2931 42.05 12.73 37.98 45.15 3.33 6.41
6th Morgan St. 0.2954 42.89 13.35 39.21 41.61 4.95 8.30
7th Bethune-Cookman 0.3034 42.31 11.96 38.97 43.95 3.21 5.85
8th Howard 0.3036 43.87 13.51 40.10 39.07 4.61 9.02
9th Coppin St. 0.3086 44.09 13.22 40.72 41.48 4.22 7.63
10th N.C. Central 0.3197 45.61 13.65 40.01 37.70 4.74 8.54
11th Delaware St. 0.3223 46.07 13.84 40.95 39.83 4.45 9.48
12th N.C. A&T 0.4095 52.72 11.77 46.74 33.94 3.84 12.92
13th Savannah St. 0.4184 53.31 11.46 47.74 34.15 3.31 12.54

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,136.8944 1,142.8782 1,151.5965 1,146.7985 1,144.5419
Difference 5.9838 14.7021 9.9041 10.1967

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
South Carolina St. 115 2,501 1,131 242 306 45.22 10.3 8.2 2,388 1,024 163 257 57.12 14.7 9.3
Florida A&M 95 1,945 868 111 184 44.63 17.5 10.6 1,874 800 125 213 57.31 15.0 8.8
Morgan St. 109 2,221 1,074 133 264 48.36 16.7 8.4 2,183 1,021 194 256 53.23 11.3 8.5
Hampton 105 2,003 888 129 181 44.33 15.5 11.1 2,020 907 170 270 55.10 11.9 7.5
Norfolk St. 91 1,637 717 126 214 43.80 13.0 7.6 1,666 751 129 209 54.92 12.9 8.0
Bethune-Cookman 116 2,345 1,004 190 291 42.81 12.3 8.1 2,432 1,103 140 271 54.65 17.4 9.0
Coppin St. 108 2,015 824 177 286 40.89 11.4 7.0 2,281 1,112 173 258 51.25 13.2 8.8
N.C. Central 108 1,874 784 144 219 41.84 13.0 8.6 2,132 1,063 211 228 50.14 10.1 9.4
Delaware St. 94 1,690 681 106 201 40.30 15.9 8.4 2,018 1,024 208 209 49.26 9.7 9.7
Howard 110 1,986 783 132 304 39.43 15.0 6.5 2,378 1,193 215 270 49.83 11.1 8.8
N.C. A&T 90 1,314 427 91 175 32.50 14.4 7.5 2,171 1,320 268 213 39.20 8.1 10.2
Savannah St. 82 1,139 375 57 137 32.92 20.0 8.3 1,937 1,210 248 223 37.53 7.8 8.7
UMES 116 32 0 213 291 0.00 0.2 0.1 289 289 141 192 0.00 2.0 1.5
Conference Average 103 1,746 735 142 235 38.23 13.5 7.7 1,982 986 183 236 46.89 11.2 8.3
  • Sets - Team Sets Played
  • S - Serves
  • SP - Service Points
  • SA - Service Aces
  • SE - Service Errors
  • SP% - Service Point Percentage
  • S/SA - Serves Per Service Ace
  • S/SE - Serves Per Service Error
  • OS - Opponent Serves
  • SPA - Service Points Allowed
  • SAA - Service Aces Allowed
  • SEA - Service Errors Against
  • SO% - Team Sideout Percentage
  • OS/SAA - Serves Per Ace Allowed
  • OS/SEA - Serves Per Error Against

The Best Games in the Mid-Eastern

Game Link EPIC Game Date Location Teams Sets Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4 Set 5
GAME

58.99

2011-10-30 Hampton, Va.
Hampton
Morgan St.
2
3
22
25
17
25
25
19
25
23
13
15
GAME

57.84

2011-10-02 Orangeburg, SC
South Carolina St.
Florida A&M
3
1
25
23
25
18
19
25
25
15
GAME

57.34

2011-11-06 Durham, N.C.
N.C. Central
Florida A&M
1
3
24
26
22
25
26
24
17
25
GAME

56.53

2011-10-16 Washington, DC
Howard
Morgan St.
3
2
22
25
25
19
26
24
29
31
15
7
GAME

55.88

2011-09-28 Norfolk, Va.
Norfolk St.
Hampton
1
3
25
14
18
25
22
25
28
30
GAME

55.86

2011-10-30 Daytona Beach, Fla.
Bethune-Cookman
South Carolina St.
1
3
19
25
20
25
25
22
23
25
GAME

55.64

2011-10-28 Tallahassee, Fla.
Florida A&M
South Carolina St.
3
0
25
17
25
20
27
25
GAME

55.44

2011-10-28 Norfolk, Va.
Norfolk St.
Morgan St.
2
3
15
25
25
17
25
23
27
29
13
15
GAME

54.89

2011-09-17 Daytona Beach, Fla.
Bethune-Cookman
Hampton
3
2
22
25
25
18
22
25
25
17
15
11
GAME

54.64

2011-10-28 Baltimore, Md.
Coppin St.
Hampton
2
3
23
25
14
25
25
23
25
18
14
16

HuskerGeek Mid-Eastern All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
A
D
S

2nd Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
A
D
S

Player of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

Attacker of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

Setter of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

Defensive Player of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

WPA

Rk. Name Team WPA
1 19.6665
2 18.8159
3 16.8572
4 15.5722
5 15.1721
6 15.1667
7 13.8061
8 13.0651
9 13.0179
10 12.6656

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 11.4967
2 11.3648
3 9.8584
4 9.5669
5 9.4544
6 9.2606
7 8.6293
8 8.2338
9 6.9132
10 6.7081

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 12.6416
2 11.1229
3 10.9009
4 9.3615
5 9.1324
6 8.8182
7 8.4640
8 8.3018
9 8.2053
10 7.8864

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2136
2 0.1832
3 0.1756
4 0.1636
5 0.1534
6 0.1468
7 0.1407
8 0.1370
9 0.1361
10 0.1355

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1160
2 0.1075
3 0.1072
4 0.1029
5 0.1015
6 0.1000
7 0.0908
8 0.0842
9 0.0831
10 0.0822

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1405
2 0.1119
3 0.1100
4 0.1079
5 0.0993
6 0.0976
7 0.0892
8 0.0891
9 0.0846
10 0.0829


Explanations

Conference Strength – The Conference Strength table has two parts.  The first row is a list of averages of the scores for a selection of teams in the conference ranging from all of them under the heading “Average” to an average of teams in the conference if we remove the top and bottom three teams.  This is designed to check if a conference is propped up by its elite teams of held down by its weakest teams.  The Composite score on the far right is an average of those scores.  It is a weighted score where the middle teams have a higher value than the edge teams.  The second row containing difference is simply a measure of how different removing the edge teams makes the conference from its initial average.  If the numbers are positive, then removing the edge teams increases the conferences rating.  If a value grows from the value before it, then the team removed at the bottom of the ratings was rated farther outside of the mean than the team removed at the top of the ratings.  It was weighing the average down so to speak.  The Composite difference at the far right is simply an average of the differences.

The Best Conference Games – A short list of the best games played between two members of the conference which is calculated using the EPIC score of each game.  EPIC score is essentially very simple amounting to adding the teams combined ViPR Rating and the total Win Probability Added scored by each team.

All-Conference Teams – All-conference teams are calculated using Win Probability Added per Set Played and the quality of the team that the player plays on. Team quality is included because better teams tend to have better players and more of them.  This often means that players on better teams have fewer opportunities than standouts on lesser teams.

Awards Lists – Each awards list uses the same formula that is used to calculate All-Conference Teams, and decides based on the focus of the list.  Player of the Year has no limitation on how the player score is added up. While Attacker of the Year must have a higher attack score than any other metric.  Similarly Setter and Defensive Player must acquire most of their score through those metrics.

HuskerGeek
HuskerGeek